Feasibility and perioperative outcomes of re-operative retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy.

PURPOSE

To present our experience with re-operative retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy (Re-RetroPN), evaluate its feasibility and safety, and compare perioperative outcomes, including renal function metrics, pathology, and complication rates, between patients that underwent Re-RetroPN and those that underwent re-operative transperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy (Re-TransPN).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted identifying patients who underwent re-operative robotic partial nephrectomy (PN) at our institution from January 2008 to December 2024. Demographic, clinical, perioperative, and pathological data were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 186 patients who underwent robotic re-operative PN were analyzed (173 Re-TransPN vs. 13 Re-RetroPN), and 1 patient was converted from Re-RetroPN to Re-TransPN. Overall, 17 (9.1%) had a solitary kidney, 138 (74.2%) underwent their second ipsilateral partial nephrectomy, and 48 (25.8%) had their third. A total of 894 tumors were removed (825 with Re-TransPN, 69 with Re-RetroPN), with a median of 3 (2-6) tumors per procedure. Perioperative metrics, including estimated blood loss, operative time, and percentage of cases performed without hilar clamping were similar between groups. Positive surgical margins were observed in 7 (4.0%) patients in the Re-TransPN group, with no positive margins reported in the Re-RetroPN group. Renal function parameters at 3 months and complication rates were comparable between groups, with 1 (7.7%) patient in the Re-RetroPN group experiencing a Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications.

CONCLUSION

Re-RetroPN is a feasible and safe option for carefully selected patients, with comparable outcomes to Re-TransPN. It provides advantages in certain scenarios, such as improved access to posteriorly located tumors and avoidance of the peritoneal cavity.